Mexico weekly ledger., 1887-03-03

y w I
or carrying concealed weapons, and
inferred into recogn5zance for his
appearance at the January term with
cave to set aside at that term. At
he June term q forfeiture of this
'ecognizance was declared by the
court. Again with leave to set
aside at the October term. We
10 not find where the forfeited recog-
nizance taken at the January term was
set aside, and hence would seem to be
10 force and should be collected. AT
the October term, 1856, the court as
the fine OF w. T. Moberly at
$50, w~hereupon the court ordered Il
stay of execution under th Moving
to-wit: As lon pc de-
PENDANT, W. +. Moberly, ~ keep
sober, so long shall this execution be
stayed, and when he, the said Mober-
ly shall get drunk, then the execution
may issue and be in full force and Ell
feet. Whereupon, ONE the defend
ant and pays Geo. Robertson 81 OF
the above fine
Weind upon examination of the re-
cord that the facts stated in the re-
port are substantially true as far as
it goes, but that some portions OF the
record were omitted. The record
shows that at the January term,
1886, (book p. page sly defendant
entered into a recognizance, and the
cause was continued to the june
term. The recognizsnce on file i;
dated January 80, 1886. The re-
cord shows a forfeiture of this re
cognizance February 18th, 1886, a
the January adjourned term of cour
(Book P, page 1917 Again at thu
June term the record shows a for
fixture of the recognizance, June 10
1886, Book P, page 1917 As bu
one recognizance had been taken, ant
| as the cast had been continued befor'
| the forfeiture on February 18th ha(
been taken, we infer the first forfeit
ure was taken through mistake, O
dlsregarded as being without author
ity Of law. The forfeiture take
| at the June term is made conditiona
that defendant failed to appear at tn
| October term. At the October term
1886, defendant did appear and en-
tered a ples of guilty and a fine o
$50 was imposed upon him. His ap
pearance, of course, avoided tn
forfeiture of the recognizance. Ih
record shows that one dollar of tn
fine was paid to Geo. Robertson, a
charged in the report, but we fin
that the money was accounted for b
him and paid to the treasurer Of tn
county, which appears from tn
~treasurer's books. The costs wei
also paid by the defendant; stay c
execution was granted as stated i
the report. Any person present VIII
desired to do SO. was called upon t
make statements as to any matter NJ
appearing of record, in this or an
other case as they were examined
and statements were thereupon mao
by E. Robinson and Geo. Robertso
which are attached hereto and mari
ed exhibits A. and b.
End. The grand jury reported ''tba
in the case of State VS.. w. Il. Lc
gan indicted (as druggist for sellin
intoxicating liquors) at the Januai
term, 1886, on two counts. At tt
following June term the said W. T
Logan appeared and plead guilty
case No. l, and was fined $40 instea
of 500, the minimum penalty fc
such offense as per session acts
1888, section No. 2, page 90
In this case the judges docket
the endorsement on the back Of tt
indictments and the record shows tt
o~ffense to have been selling liquC
without license, though the body
the indictments was for selling liqut
as a druggist.
In this case statements We're mac
by Judge Robinson and George Ro'
ertson, which we attached al
marked exhibits G and d.
Bird. The jury reports "In the case
State VS.. Hamilton Hall indicted
the October term 1885, as druggis
for selling liquor contrary to the prt
vision of the law regulating druggi:
and pharmacists. That at the followin
June term the said Hamilton Ha
appeared and entered his plea {
guilty on all six counts. Whereupo
the court assessed his fine at $40 eac
in the six indictments, making a tot:
fine Of $240, Gnstead of 5000 a
cording to session acts of 1885,
section No. ?, page 9O,) and the cos
in each indictment, and execution O
dered to issue therefor; whereupo
comes the court and orders a stay {
execution in counts 4, 5 and 6 81
each making a total fine stayed s12(
This stay of execution is granted o
the following conditions: Whence,
er defendant goes into the drug bu:
mess in Mexico, Mo-, this stay {
execution is dissolved and e~xecutio
may be issued on the indictments 4,
6 for Sl20. We recommend an c,
~ecution be issued"
Upon an examination of the recor
we find returns of indie
ments at the October term, 1885. an
found IL indictments endorsed Dc
25th, 1885. These we're for sellin
liquor without license. At Januar
term, 1886, the record shows (pag
93) eleven indictments pendin
against Hall. on the LIST day ,
February, 1886, seven of these wei
dismissed and four continued. Eel
ruary LIST, 1886, defendant pleads nj
guilty to indictments No. / to
szzl.n 100 Lt.I It. 100